I had thought that if under an infinitesimal rotation by [tex]\theta[/tex] around the(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); z-axis a quantity transforms according to

[tex]\psi\rightarrow\left(1+i\left[S+\left(\frac{1}{i}x\frac{\partial}{\partial y}-\frac{1}{i}y\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\right)\right]\theta\right)\psi[/tex]

then the operator S is by definition thez-component of the spin operator for that quantity.

However, the Dirac field operator transforms (in the appropriate representation) according to

[tex]\psi\rightarrow\left(1+i\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\sigma_{z}&0\\ 0&\sigma_{z}\end{array}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{i}x\frac{\partial}{\partial y}-\frac{1}{i}y\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\right)\right)\theta\right]\right)\psi[/tex]

yet https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521478146/103-7918027-3072619?v=glance&n=283155 states that [tex]\tau_{z}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\sigma_{z}&0\\0&\sigma_{z}\end{array}\right)[/tex] cannot be the spin operator because it does not commute with [tex]\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}[/tex] The correct spin operator is--or has something to do with--the Pauli-Lubanski pseudovector.

My question is, first, what's wrong with not commuting with [tex]\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}[/tex]? Why is that necessary for the a good spin operator?

And secondly, if [tex]\tau_{z}[/tex] is not a good spin operator, what about the fact that it generates the non-scalar part of a rotation? Is that not the definition of spin?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# What is spin? (advanced question)

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**